If this is your first visit to the Roth Army, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Bernie Saunders on Rogan

3 million views in a day, surely more informative than those network TV debates.

I think what both his supporters and people that have a fear of some socialist USA forget is that the president doesn't have as much power as they think and a president Bernie would only be able to nudge his agenda a little, most of the things he's talking about he could never get through. So the argument is can you fall up a cliff by reaching high and getting up a little bit?

I still think that with a population of 300 million surely there is someone that is better suited to a job than someone who would be running the country at 82...

Age can fade people quite quickly, it's not that long ago that Giuliani came across as reasonably sane...

I've listened to a few interviews with Bernie... without the counter-balance of Hilary he's got little to stand on and less to stand out. He's sounding more and more old and out of touch just like Biden is... Their era is slipping away and I don't see either of the old farts being elected.

I've listened to a few interviews with Bernie... without the counter-balance of Hilary he's got little to stand on and less to stand out. He's sounding more and more old and out of touch just like Biden is... Their era is slipping away and I don't see either of the old farts being elected.

Bernie just runs because he likes the attention and he makes money from it. He knows he has no chance in hell of winning. Bernie is crazy like a fox. The corporate money is on Joe Biden. The money will go to him. Warren is actually the best candidate on the Dem side but Joe is going to get more money and support. Biden is too tied in with China and right now that's a huge liability. I wouldn't be surprised to see Michelle Obama come in and change the game. Nobody running now can beat Trump. The big question is does Michelle Obama want to get into it? She's rich and enjoying the good life. Some people don't like being in the arena. Some people are addicted to it. I think Michelle just wants to enjoy what she has now.

The thing is the Dems are divided and infighting and the Republicans are unified behind Trump. I think Trump is going to win a second term but by the time 2024 rolls around they might have things straightened out and socialism is popular with the younger people. So maybe they will have someone by then who can beat the Republicans. The Republicans being in power will surely screw up. I think who they will run in 2024 is Ted Cruz. Ted is already getting his ducks in a row to be the next MAGA president. That being said Ted is a dweeb so if the Dems kind find somebody is cool they can mop the floor with Ted. Just run some popular celebrity that's young and charismatic. Hell. Modern presidents are just puppets anyways. You don't need anyone capable or intelligent. You just need someone who can win.

3 million views in a day, surely more informative than those network TV debates.

I think what both his supporters and people that have a fear of some socialist USA forget is that the president doesn't have as much power as they think and a president Bernie would only be able to nudge his agenda a little, most of the things he's talking about he could never get through. So the argument is can you fall up a cliff by reaching high and getting up a little bit?

I still think that with a population of 300 million surely there is someone that is better suited to a job than someone who would be running the country at 82...

Age can fade people quite quickly, it's not that long ago that Giuliani came across as reasonably sane...

I think people are more interested in seeing if Bernie smoked one of Joe's blunts and what kind of whiskey Bernie slams down.

We'll see how the primaries play out... if Biden gets the nomination... I see a repeat of a weak sauce, gaff prone Dem losing to an incumbent Republican. Anyone remember John Kerry...

The Dems can’t win as fragmented as they are. It’s a cycle. They lose for a decade when they move too far left and alienate the more centrist voters. It happened in the 80’s and that gave us a decade of Republican rule and when the Democrats finally moved to the center again they got Bill Clinton in.

So we will get two terms of Trump and if the Dems haven’t sorted it out by 2024 we get another Republican for at least another term. By then the Republican scandals and corruption will make the swing voters angry and they will vote Dem. it never ends. Different day, same shit.

There is a pretty compelling case that the Saudis will put a bunch of money into the 2020 election. With Trump they get to completely own US foreign policy rather than just influencing it through all their lobby groups and 'think tanks' like they used to.

Do you really just pull this random fucking nonsense out of your ass? You really don't drink or do drugs? I mean, FFS. I 'm not a Bern-feeler, but...

Originally Posted by Nitro Express

Bernie just runs because he likes the attention and he makes money from it. He knows he has no chance in hell of winning.

A completely untrue and unfair statement. Bern may have no chance of winning, but he fuck-well didn't see that coming and thought he had a great chance to win if not a shoe in! By all accounts he's shocked at his political decline from almost toasting Hillary to also ran...

Bernie is crazy like a fox.

Why? Does he believe in stupid fucking conspiracy theories?

The corporate money is on Joe Biden. The money will go to him.

The corporate money has its head up its ass, as usual. There is no monolithic "corporate money" though...

Warren is actually the best candidate on the Dem side but Joe is going to get more money and support.

Specifically why is Warren "the best"? Why do you think she is the best?

Biden is too tied in with China and right now that's a huge liability.

As far as what? How is Biden "tied to China"? Do you go to bars in Shithole, Wyoming and spout this crap to your friends like you actually know what you are talking about? Do your hick friends nod their heads in agreement?

I wouldn't be surprised to see Michelle Obama come in and change the game. Nobody running now can beat Trump.

Sure, tell me the last time Trump was over 50% approval. But no one can beat him? He beats himself every day...

The big question is does Michelle Obama want to get into it? She's rich and enjoying the good life. Some people don't like being in the arena. Some people are addicted to it. I think Michelle just wants to enjoy what she has now.

The answer is fuck no, Michelle Obama does not want to get "into it". IU think that's pretty fucking academic at this point...

This is more of a gut feeling than anything based on data or analytics, but if I look at the candidates who have won over the last few decades, all the winners tend to be the ones who had more voters who believed in them vs. their opponent in an aspirational way, rather than prevailing because people were voting more against their opponent than for them.

In 2012, one never got the sense that Republican voters were ever particularly crazy about Romney. Romney ran more along the lines of "I'm not Obama" than anything else, and he lost.

In 2004, one never got the sense that Democratic voters by and large were over the moon regarding John Kerry, who (in the end) basically ran as being the anti-W, and he lost.

In 2008, Obama was certainly an aspirational candidate. He electrified Democratic voters in a manner that no other Democratic presidential candidate had in my lifetime...even far more so than Clinton in 1992. On the other side of the ticket, I felt WAY more enthusiasm for Sarah Palin than I ever did for John McCain.

In 2016, I never felt much by way of enthusiasm for Hillary Clinton. I wasn't enthusiastic about Hillary Clinton, even though I knew fairly early on (well before Trump declared) that I'd end up voting for her if she got the nomination. In point of fact, I became less and less enthusiastic about Hillary Clinton the longer the campaign went on, to the point that by the time Election Day came around the only real motivating factor for me going to the polls was that I lived in a swing state, knew the election was going to be close and whatever misgivings I had about Clinton were negated by the belief that Trump was uniquely unqualified in terms of intellect, emotional and mental stability and temperament to be President. I'll be willing to wager by the end of the 2016 campaign, a lot of Clinton voters felt the same way I did, and perhaps more of them felt even more strongly about it than I did to the point where people stayed home rather than voted: a lot of people held their noses and voted for Hillary Clinton simply out of a visceral dislike for Trump.

One never saw the enthusiasm for Hillary Clinton at her rallies in 2016 that they saw for Trump at his rallies. Whatever one wants to make of the reasons why Trump voters were attracted to the guy (one tends to think it wasn't for massive, lopsided tax cuts favoring those who didn't need them), the fervor of their devotion to Trump isn't something to be taken lightly.

As for the Democrats seeking the nomination thus far, the only comparable fervor I see is for either Sanders or Warren.

I see virtually nada in terms of genuine enthusiasm for Biden the person.

Biden seems likable enough far as politicians go, but he seems to be a cautious, safe choice. He has name recognition. He has been around forever. Apparently the large donor class seem to think he's the best candidate in a matchup against Trump. Biden isn't a moonshot candidate in any sense of the word, whereas at least Hillary Clinton was a limited moonshot by virtue of her gender. Biden only looks good now after three years of watching Trump in office: I'm not so sure Biden would have won the nomination in 2016 had he ran, although paradoxically I think Biden may have fared better than Hillary against Trump in the 2016 general, because Hillary proved to be nearly as toxic as Trump in terms of voters being repelled by her with a vitriol I'd find hard to imagine a Biden candidacy would have elicited.

But Biden's only real calling card in 2020 seems to be a return to the pre-2016 status quo, by the sole virtue of him not being Trump. Now, it may well be that there will be more voters next year than there were in 2016 who aren't willing to pull a lever for Trump again. It may be that a Biden candidacy isn't one where Democratic voters feel they have to hold their noses and vote for Joe like they did for Hillary, and it may be that more people are attuned to the realization that Trump could well win again as opposed to the general belief in 2016 that there was no way America would vote for Donald Trump, which doubtless suppressed some turnout.

I don't get the sense that masses of 2016 Trump voters aren't willing to vote for him again.

Who the fuck knows? I don't think anybody, despite all the polling and prognostication, really does at this point.

...
In 2012, one never got the sense that Republican voters were ever particularly crazy about Romney. Romney ran more along the lines of "I'm not Obama" than anything else, and he lost.
...

In 2008, Obama was certainly an aspirational candidate. He electrified Democratic voters in a manner that no other Democratic presidential candidate had in my lifetime...even far more so than Clinton in 1992....

Do you really just pull this random fucking nonsense out of your ass? You really don't drink or do drugs? I mean, FFS. I 'm not a Bern-feeler, but...

A completely untrue and unfair statement. Bern may have no chance of winning, but he fuck-well didn't see that coming and thought he had a great chance to win if not a shoe in! By all accounts he's shocked at his political decline from almost toasting Hillary to also ran...

Why? Does he believe in stupid fucking conspiracy theories?

The corporate money has its head up its ass, as usual. There is no monolithic "corporate money" though...

Specifically why is Warren "the best"? Why do you think she is the best?

As far as what? How is Biden "tied to China"? Do you go to bars in Shithole, Wyoming and spout this crap to your friends like you actually know what you are talking about? Do your hick friends nod their heads in agreement?

Sure, tell me the last time Trump was over 50% approval. But no one can beat him? He beats himself every day...

The answer is fuck no, Michelle Obama does not want to get "into it". IU think that's pretty fucking academic at this point...

How’s your blood pressure Nick? It really doesn’t take much to trigger you.

Bookies have Trump as favorite for 2020 which shows the sad state of the world.

Michelle Obama is 200-1 Nitro but I'll give you 100-1 if you want to take that bet?

Oh you know there are people pestering her to run. She would be a contender. She’s a superstar to the left. She hated living in the White House though and I don’t think she’s power driven like many politicians are.

You really think gaffs matter at this point? Trump looked like a complete fucktard in Ohio, yet you still support him...

No, the gaffs don't really matter much at this phase... all they do is highlight a lack of compelling vision for leading the country and the ability to articulate it. In a field of 20+ that's not the catalyst to stand out, build momentum, win a nomination and seriously challenge Trump.

That's the goal at this point... isn't it..?

That's what's lacking across the field. There's a few that have some of that... but then they spout idiotic crap like free healthcare for all, open borders, or climate change nonsense that can not be realistically achieved without tanking the entire nation economically and undermining our strengths globally. Those pie in the sky aspects won't capture the hearts/votes of the majority of the nation and lead to unseating Trump.

I'd really rather be faced with a difficult decision with a viable Democratic challenger that would be worthy of serious consideration for my vote... That someone hasn't shown themselves yet.

????? Hillary spent a fortune on television ads and Trump used Twitter and won.

IDR but I don't think Trump was noted for using Twatter prior to being pResident. In any case, you mean the Twitter that cuntservatives now hate, but still use religiously?

I mean, Bitch McConnell could always follow his credo and not use it?

Hillary ran an old styled campaign and Trump used the internet to great effect.

Um, another gross oversimplification. I concede that Hillary is and was a bit behind the times, but Trump could barely figure out an internet browser. The Russian military intelligence troll-farm was doing much more for Trump and his campaign than he, or his confused staff, were on the web. And the greatest shot to Hillary's campaign was Comey reopening the "email" investigation on the eve of the election. She'd have almost certainly have won had that not been a November surprise...

Oh you know there are people pestering her to run. She would be a contender. She’s a superstar to the left. She hated living in the White House though and I don’t think she’s power driven like many politicians are.

No, the gaffs don't really matter much at this phase... all they do is highlight a lack of compelling vision for leading the country and the ability to articulate it. In a field of 20+ that's not the catalyst to stand out, build momentum, win a nomination and seriously challenge Trump.

That's the goal at this point... isn't it..?

"Change"? Momentum to change? I think you completely misconstrue things. There's a reason there are 20+ Democratic candidates and everyone that was the registered Democrat town do catcher is running - because they all have a great shot against Drumpf...

That's what's lacking across the field. There's a few that have some of that... but then they spout idiotic crap like free healthcare for all,

You mean like every other Westernized capitalistic democracy has? I mean, fuckwell right! How sensible to spend billions more than every other country and still have worse overall health outcomes. How could they ever think of that!

..open borders,

As opposed to Trumps closed borders and Wall?

..or climate change nonsense that can not be realistically achieved without tanking the entire nation economically and undermining our strengths globally. Those pie in the sky aspects won't capture the hearts/votes of the majority of the nation and lead to unseating Trump.

LMFAO old man, Really, like Climate Change isn't going to bury the world in a mire of rising sea levels and cause economic catastrophe. See the forest through the trees, old man...

I'd really rather be faced with a difficult decision with a viable Democratic challenger that would be worthy of serious consideration for my vote... That someone hasn't shown themselves yet.

You mean, basically George Bush at this point...

However you want to rationalize voting for a complete fucking train-wreck administration that can't even fill basic State Dep't positions while Trump golf's. Keep voting with all the other old, scared white people, bud. Because no thinking, serious person can look at this admin and say, "hey, they got this!"..

Mmm...yeah, but when Obama was seeking the nomination in 2007 and early to mid 2008 the vibe I got wasn't as much "I'm not Hillary" as it was "I'm Barack Obama"...if that makes any sense. Mostly because he couldn't really make the "I'm not Hillary" case in a meaningful political sense, because they were ideologically more similar than dissimilar.

No, the gaffs don't really matter much at this phase... all they do is highlight a lack of compelling vision for leading the country and the ability to articulate it. In a field of 20+ that's not the catalyst to stand out, build momentum, win a nomination and seriously challenge Trump.

That's the goal at this point... isn't it..?

That's what's lacking across the field. There's a few that have some of that... but then they spout idiotic crap like free healthcare for all, open borders, or climate change nonsense that can not be realistically achieved without tanking the entire nation economically and undermining our strengths globally. Those pie in the sky aspects won't capture the hearts/votes of the majority of the nation and lead to unseating Trump.i

I'd really rather be faced with a difficult decision with a viable Democratic challenger that would be worthy of serious consideration for my vote... That someone hasn't shown themselves yet.

Aw come on. The Dems have plenty of brilliant thinkers. AOC really made a great observation that airplanes are damn loud and pollute the air. Why fly to Hawaii when you could take a train there? It would give the people living by the airports a break and we could grow native vegetables where the airports used to be. It would be great but donít grow any of that racist colliflower.

Aw come on. The Dems have plenty of brilliant thinkers. AOC really made a great observation that airplanes are damn loud and pollute the air. Why fly to Hawaii when you could take a train there?...

When did she say that and what was the quote?

AOC is like every ultra-conservatives' socialist dominatrix. She's a junior congresswoman with very littel actual clout that is fixated upon by Faux News for whatever reason, but there really is something creepily psycho-sexual about it...

LMFAO old man, Really, like Climate Change isn't going to bury the world in a mire of rising sea levels and cause economic catastrophe. See the forest through the trees, old man...

Climate change is 100% real...

4.543 billion years of history and the last 100 years of science advancements prove without a doubt that the planet's climate has changed significantly and continues to do so on a yearly/monthly/daily/hourly basis... but in that 4.543 billion years, only about .000001%... I'm being generous... "might" be attributable to human activity and none of it can be controlled by elected officials in the US government.

Yes, the seas will rise... they do so twice a day due to the gravitational pull of the moon not who's farting around in the White House... elect the fucking moon if you want an entity that can have a direct impact on climate change. That's your best shot...

Maybe Zah can explain to us how great CO2 is! You can never have too much CO2 and plants love! It must be good! Just like water (that will soon drown out a large number of coastal cities)....

It's really funny how stupid otherwise educated and experienced can be. 'I want to believe we're not fucked,' and even if we are the industrial revolution and the previous onset of organized agriculture had nothing to do with it (even if it directly corresponds with both and the resulting spikes of CO in the atmosphere)...

4.543 billion years of history and the last 100 years of science advancements prove without a doubt that the planet's climate has changed significantly and continues to do so on a yearly/monthly/daily/hourly basis... but in that 4.543 billion years, only about .000001%... I'm being generous... "might" be attributable to human activity and none of it can be controlled by elected officials in the US government.

Yes, the seas will rise... they do so twice a day due to the gravitational pull of the moon not who's farting around in the White House... elect the fucking moon if you want an entity that can have a direct impact on climate change. That's your best shot...

Oh it's real.
The Mesolithic peoples of 6500 BC and their farting herds of livestock and SUV's caused the seas to rise enough to make Doggerland, once an island between Britain and Sweden, disappear under the sea. Hell, we haven't been able to do that. Bastards!

4.543 billion years of history and the last 100 years of science advancements prove without a doubt that the planet's climate has changed significantly and continues to do so on a yearly/monthly/daily/hourly basis... but in that 4.543 billion years, only about .000001%... I'm being generous... "might" be attributable to human activity and none of it can be controlled by elected officials in the US government.

Yes, the seas will rise... they do so twice a day due to the gravitational pull of the moon not who's farting around in the White House... elect the fucking moon if you want an entity that can have a direct impact on climate change. That's your best shot...

A global carbon tax and the United Nations can fix it. Of course China will be exempt and allowed to pollute penalty free.

Oh it's real.
The Mesolithic peoples of 6500 BC and their farting herds of livestock and SUV's caused the seas to rise enough to make Doggerland, once an island between Britain and Sweden, disappear under the sea. Hell, we haven't been able to do that. Bastards!

The real global warming happens in five billion years when our sun expands into a red giant and consumes this planet. Until then there is a long list of shit that can kill you. We might even get pummeled by a few large asteroids by then.

Get China and all the other Asian, African, and South American hyper-polluters on board and I'm with you. Otherwise it's pointless aside from keeping our own rivers and coasts clean. Let's start with our feces and rat infested inner cities and work our way out.

[QUOTE=private parts;1940428]Get China and all the other Asian, African, and South American hyper-polluters on board and I'm with you. Otherwise it's pointless aside from keeping our own rivers and coasts clean. Let's start with our feces and rat infested inner cities and work our way out.[/QUOTE

Ha! Ha! The world has lost it’s mind. Our demise is quite entertaining to watch.

Get China and all the other Asian, African, and South American hyper-polluters on board and I'm with you. Otherwise it's pointless aside from keeping our own rivers and coasts clean. Let's start with our feces and rat infested inner cities and work our way out.[/QUOTE

Ha! Ha! The world has lost it’s mind. Our demise is quite entertaining to watch.

Right-O!! You dumbshits in Wyoming can smell your farts and fuck some 10 year old cousins and pretend it's okay!